Is It SAFE To Sell Out Your Community? The WakeMed Example...

              Bad for your health - both fiscal and physical?

Folks keep asking : "What does the take down of a community hospital [link] in North Carolina have to do with our rampant credit union merger mania - and the SAFE/Boeing merger-murk?"

Here, check out this interview from local WRAL-TV [link]. First point is that prices rise, competition declines after mergers. The reporter's comment on the difficulty of getting direct answers 'beyond the PR-speak and beating around the bush responses' sounds familiar; and then the interview with an unconvincing CEO seals the comparison, don't you think?

Won't go back over the controversy which has erupted with our Governor (a "D") and State Treasure (an "R") critiquing the deal and the "slip it by sneak tactics" of the WakeMed Boarsd [link].  But you should know that the outcry has prompted a 90-day pause in the vote and major improvements "in the deal", amounting to over $2.2 billion in greater committed financial benefits to Wake County and its' citizens. But in the meantime, WakeMed still has lost its chief operating officer and chief physician exec, who have jumped ship.

Much like the SAFE/Boeing merger, it was very clear from the start that the WakeMed merger was a bad deal for the owners. Shinning a little media light and political heat on the merger-murk has appeared to stampede several cockroach-crazy assumptions put forth in the original proposal.

SAFE members and Sacramento would certainly benefit from a pause, much greater discussion, and a far better deal. Someone needs to turn on the lights and turn up the heat in California!

✔ The vote on WakeMed is scheduled for 2:00 pom today! Stay tuned.

  "Cockroach-crazy" ... where did that come from? 

SECU: Those Questionable "No Amendment Amendments"...

  "Ask, and it shall be given you..."    Hope so!

While we're on the subject of amendments and democratic rights ['The First Amendment" - link], lets square up on those mysterious SECU bylaw amendments approved by the SECU Board last September.  

Those amendments allegedly further restrict SECU member rights to participate in the CU; and, virtually eliminate the possibility of independent, member-nominated candidates seeking a seat on the SECU Board.

✅ As you know when CEO Leigh Brady was asked directly about those elusive bylaw amendments at the 2025 Annual Meeting [here take a look - link], she chose to equivocate. Not exactly a great trust-building tactic for any leader.

As required, that amendment question has been resubmitted in advance for the 2026 Annual Membership Meeting, as follows:

✔ "Please publish the wording of the  bylaw amendments approved by the SECU Board in September, 2025; explain their purpose and intent; and state if the amendments have been modified or rescinded? Thank you."

Several blog readers have forwarded questions which they wanted asked. Sorry, can't do it, beacuse the SECU Board has limited each member to one question only!

👉 If you wish to submit a question to be answered by Ms. Brady go to this [link] and register to attend the Annual meeting.** At the end of the registration, you are given the opportunity to ask your one question. Last year 91 questions were submitted.

✅ While you're at it, please consider casting your votes for Julian Hawes and Barry Browning. Your ballot is still valid if you vote only for the 2 member-nominated candidates.  [link]

 

 Your right to speak has been prohibited by the Board ... is this your last chance to ask a question?

 ** Note: You are not required to attend the meeting to ask the question.